Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1887-09-29
Tribune Dispat III. !

GErrYsBURG.S pit. 27.-The Hon. Edward
in reply to inquiries from Senator Allison.
of Iowa:
The statement ~ which you ask my
attention, respecting president Clevelands
official record on Union soldiers" copied
from ..The National View" Washington
%. C } weekly paper bears marks of prepare
ton for purpose That purpose is to show
that the Cleveland Administration is more
entitled to the respect and confidence of the
Union soldiery of the country than the Adj
ministration of either Grant, or HAYES, or
Arthur 1t seeks to make the impression
that Cleveland has been more liberal and
more just tt the soldiery than either of his
predecessors. And it claims, in terms, that
Cleveland has approved II more private
pension bills than Grant and Hayes combined,
and l27 more than Arthur.
The statement" is false both in its asser-
tons and suggestions.
First. As to its assertions. The pension
story of the KILN Congress is this
Pension Bills passed in two sessions. 9i9
Bills approved by Cleveland, 66S
Bills vetoed by Cleveland, l24
Bills. become Laws by lapse of time without
Cleveland's Approval 1856
Bills "pocketed" by Cleveland.
Total 94s
OF the bills passed TAI were in the first ses-
sion of that Congress and POP in the second
session
OF the bills vetoed, 1Ol were in the first
session and % in the second.
The truth, therefore, is that President
Cleveland "approved about two thirds of the
bills passed, "vetoed" over one eighth, and
| ttJodpajv n the remainder
Second. As to the suggestions of the
statement. Its purpose is to contrast the
Grant Hayes and Arthur pension records
with Cleveland's to the advantage of the
latter Now what are the facts about those
administrations.
of the 493 pension bills passed under the
Grant administration, Grant vetoed eight.
Two because the claimants names were then
on the pension roll Another, because the
clause in the act about the minor children OF
the soldier had no meaning. Three were
vetoed because the names of the claimants
were borne on the army rolls as deserters.
| Another, because the name of the pensoner
was not correctly given. And the last, be-
cause the soldiers company was not correctly
stated. He signed 4S5. This is Grants
record on pension vetoes.
What is Hsyes' and Arthurs' record. I'm
passed. He approved them all.
Under Arthur, 736 private pension bills
were passed by Congress He approved them
all.
Clevelsnd's spprovss were but Cos out of
949 passed. ard are thus l20 less than Grants
and HAYES combined, and 6S less than Ar
thurs out of total of 1853 greater than the
| former. and 2l3 greater than the latter.
The contrast is what might have been ex-
pected in advance OF investigation. Grant,
| HAYES aud Arthur were all actually engaged
| in the suppression of the rebellion, and were
| in full personal sympathy with the armies of
the Union. Clevelsnd's record as President
is not out of harmony with his psssiveness as
citizen during the struggle.
! II is true, IS claimed, that Cleveland signed
the widows Increase bill, and the Crippled
Soldiers Increase bill. Ii is also true that he
signed the Mexicsn War Pension bill which
awards a service pension as distinguished
| from disability pension to the soldiers of
that war. But it is also true that within ten
DAYS thereafter he vetoed the bill which pro-
posed application of substantially the same
principle TO the soldiers of the army of the
Union His friends have the floor t. align
that extraordinary discrimination against the
Union soldiery with this extraordinary pre-
tension of friendship for them.
| Undoubtedly the Pension Office is doing 3
great deal of work. Congress INTENDED ,nat
it should when the additional agents and Gle &.
liberally given that office to meet the new an ,
increasing demands upon it left its chief with
out excuse for delays Had the Commission r
of Pensions been less vigorous in admin t.
| ton, he would have been simply d,rrlict n
! duty. But that fact does not hide from the